The Future is Here

[Lenslinger]

ATTENTION: The following is NOT an endorsement of the oft-maligned VJ Principle. Though I’m sure it will be construed as such by certain contributors, I ask that you hold off on any anti-Rosenblum screeds for two simple reasons: A) This has nothing to do with him and, B) that sh!t is really, really dull…

I covered a job fair today. You know, people in dress clothes milling about with résumés in one hand and free donuts in the other…not exactly an Amish Dance-Off. Still, I hustled on over, lest The Suits change their minds and send me on a walking tour of the new urinal factory - or worse yet, court. Anyhoo, two thoughts struck me as I tried not to club any of the great unwashed with my tripod: 1) Our nation is in dire peril. For a community college job fair, there were more forty-something Dads with lost looks in their eyes than at Home Depot on a Saturday morning, and 2) the average news crew has dropped a lot of weight…

Of the four fancycams in attendance, three were being operated by teams of one. Not by shooters sleepwalking through their third spray-job of the day, not by college kids with lenses the size of yo-yo’s, but by reporters who shoot, shooters who speak (and one jack-ass photog who thinks he’s Hunter S. Thompson). My point: The future is here. With on-air advertising in the cellar and TV stations about to go through the same cutbacks now eviscerating the newspaper industry, the solo-newsgatherer now walks among us. If that very fact boils your blood, you’re not gonna like the following paragraphs. But with what’s about to hit broadcasters, not digging my drivel will be the least of your problems.

I don’t work in a large market. I’m not a freelancer. I’ve not jetted around the globe with a sound-man, a make-up chick and three skeevy handlers. I don’t know dick about unions. What I DO know, however, is medium-market TV news and how it’s never going to be the same as it was even a year ago. Just ask the Gannet staffers across the street. Most of their two person crews now seem to work without the aid of each other. Ask the weekend anchor now learning to edit, the super-hot news bunny studying meteorology, the news director trying to wrap his head around Twitter. They’ll all tell you, “This ain’t your Father’s Oldsmobile.” Yes, age old assumptions are falling by the wayside as budgets shrink and individual expectations grow. Will it make for better television? In most cases, NO. But here’s a real newsflash:

It doesn’t really matter.

Now before you flame me for dismissing any and all vestiges of quality, hear me out: I wish unemployment on no one. (Well, that’s a lie. There are few folks I’ve worked with I’d like to push in front of a bus, let alone hand a pink slip.) Whereas Rosenblum seeks to burn down our huts and villages and Nino lies in wait to blowtorch him back, I just want to make good TV and get paid for it. I suspect most of you on this board wish to do the same, and while many of you have developed skills that far surpass mine, I’m more concerned with the younger ones among us. I worry they’ll drink Rosey’s Kool-Aid and trade in their tripods for black turtlenecks, or believe his many detractors when they say he’s simply out of his gourd. He’s not. He’s got a version of the future he’d like to sell you and while I differ with him greatly, I certainly see where he’s coming from. And where this silly business is headed.

Take MY bosses for example. I’m not entirely sure they know who Rosenblum is. But they damn sure know about diminished revenue streams, managerial mandates and the low-cost lure of all those baked-potato cams. So far, they’ve yet to shove one in any shooter’s hand and while I’m not volunteering to be the first, I know that day is coming. Not because some self-proclaimed prophet said so on the internets, but because the quantum leap in technology and giant sucking sound up in Sales will soon demand it. Hopefully I can keep a grip on my heavy glass, for its functionality liberates me. But while I cradle my XDCam in one arm, I’m busy scooping up new skills with the other. Why? Not to impress you schlubs, but to keep the steak and bourbon money flowing into Casa Pittman. It’s really that simple…Like your job? Fine, learn another one while you’re at it. Maybe they’ll let you keep both of them.

You know, I talk lots of smack about certain reporter-types. Two decades of dragging prom queens of widow’s porches will do that to a fella. Still, I value the role reporters play and hope they never disappear completely from our ranks. That said, I’m more than happy to work without them, provided my bosses continue to grasp when the solo shtick is warranted and when it simply sucks balls. Newsrooms that can crack that nut will continue to hoard relevancy long into the Nuclear Winter that is about to decimate our population at large. So, I beg you junior shooters out there: Add to your skill-set. Take a stab at writing a script, even if it’s just connecting the soundbites with sentences that pop in your head. Learn every non-linear editing system you can lay hands on. Commit your particular region to memory. Pass out business cards to contacts and encourage them to call YOU - not that putz on the desk. (You know, the one who’s learning your job on his off-hours.) Do this, and you stand a much better chance of retaining a logo’d pay-stub than that semi-hottie who never thought she’s ever have to lift anything heavy.

But please, don’t take my word for it (I can be a bit of a blowhard). Instead, turn to b-roll elder Richard Adkins, known better here as RAD. If you’re like me, you read his steady updates of bliss-inducing gigs and think, “How does this dude score all these sweet shoots?”. I’ll tell you how: Dude hustles like it’s his first week on the job. He interjects himself into the editorial side of news-gathering, not just the pretty pictures and nifty nat-pops. Most of all, he writes his own scripts much of the time, freeing himself from the shackles of a talking hair-do so he can go turn far-flung epics, watching lighthouses move, riding on submarines, catching White House Christmas trees as they fall from their mountainside homes. You want a career like that? Free reign of an entire state while still sleeping in your own bed most nights? You can still have it. All you hafta do, is do it ALL.

Most of it, anyway.

 

[schlagdrg]

There is a certain liberation in working as a one person band. Doing it your way. I spent the last two years working solo on the overnights. While I hated the shift, I enjoyed the freedom. Did I report? Occassionally, but not on cam, but from behind the cam. I have a face that's more suited behind the viewfinder. I frequently turned pkg's, using the sots to tell the story instead of a reporters track.

I thought I was successful, and so did my coworkers.

I now work with a reporter, life is easier. It doesn't all fall onto my shoulders. There is a shared responsibility. I can now concentrate on the shooting, and let him concentrate on the interviews and writing. But there are days when I miss the freedom of the solo. Shooting it my way and not his. My focus. My storytelling.

With reporters, their job requires them to be an important element of the story. Active standups, active liveshots... Looking and sounding good. But for me, all that was required was a good story. Good storytelling, compelling video and audio, blah, blah, blah.

In a perfect world, that would be enough. But we don't live in that world. The public doesn't look at the news the same way we do. They don't notice the jumpcuts, or the bad whitebalance. They notice the anchors and reporters. They coudn't tell the difference between a Nino well lit inteview or one lit with a top light. To them it "just doesn't matter".

What does it all mean? Heck, I don't no. I'm a photog, not a manager. I don't have to pay the bills and worry about shareholders. I just do my job to the best of my ability and hope one of those twenty-somethings doesn't come along and take my job.

 

[LongTimePhotog]

You know...some 24 years ago when I started my journey in television I have heard every 3-4 years that this business is going to change. Some things did change. Some for the better, some for the worst. I watched people come and go and wondered if it was going to change that much. Well, time to wake from the dream of television from the old days.

A new dawn has arrived and I have to agree with lenslinger...you better roll with it or it's going to roll over you! Great post. I really enjoy your insights.

 

[newsshooter]

I love the post Lenslinger. If anyone needs to write and be a VJ it's you. You can put words together like no one's business. I see where it's going and I get it to, but I think they (management) are going about it the wrong way. They are forcing people to shoot who don't have a clue where to point the camera. I did some training with some of these new VJ's and wow what an eye opener. Producers and reporters with 20 years in the business never watched what the photographer does. "White balance... what's that!!" "Oh that's why I'm holding up that white piece of paper or showing you my shirt for 3 seconds on every shoot." It kills me explaining the basics. There are a few that are great at the VJ gig so give them the jobs. Why do we have to have the whole station as VJ's. Anchors are anchors for a reason. Beauty queens are devas for a reason. Don't give them cameras. They don't get it!!! Let them do their live shots and smile at the camera. It's fine having 4 or 5 VJ's, but everyone in the newsroom, really!! Back on my last post: News Director says everyone gets a camera, is now happening. I haven't drank the juice yet, but they are pouring it and about ready to slide it my way. I have 25 years before retiring. Do I jump into freelancing, find another career, or drink the juice and go with this little plan. There's lots to think about. I still have a job, it pays well for what I do, and we haven't had a fur-cation yet so life shouldn't be bad right? Look at tvjobs, these VJ gigs are everywhere. I don't think we can run from it because it will follow us. Good luck to all and don't be nervous on that first live shot. There are only a few 100,000 watching.

 

[At the scene]

Lenslinger nice post. One thing from your post stuck out for me and that was the line "it doesn't really matter". That seems to be the motto of our world today "It doesn't matter" or" It's good enough". When will it start to "matter" and when will it be "great".

People keep saying adapt or die. Honestly I chose death because in today's world of news gathering "It doesn't matter" or" It's good enough" is all you are going to get. Owners,Managers do not care about the News product we see that everyday. Like most of you I shoot 3 half ass stories a day. My shift is from 2-10pm (1 story for 5),(1 story for 6), (1 story for 10). I shoot with a reporter we do the best we can but it's not great "it's good enough". Now make him shoot and make me report and what you will get is 6 "it doesn't really matter" stories. I ask you, what the hell does technology have to do with that!

So I have no problem chosing death when the VJ,DJ,DC or whatever you call a onemanband comes to my station. I would rather stock shelves in the grocery store or drive around in a brown truck.

 

[Freddie Mercury]

A new dawn has arrived and I have to agree with lenslinger...you better roll with it or it's going to roll over you!

That's just short of Rosenblum's "Adapt or Die" I've been in this discussion more times than I can count, so I won't restate more than this: Stick to the facts. Doomsaying and heavy warnings may make you feel superior or important, but they do nothing but scare people or piss them off, neither of which is helpful. Put me down as the latter.

 

[AKinDC]

That's just short of Rosenblum's "Adapt or Die" I've been in this discussion more times than I can count, so I won't restate more than this: Stick to the facts. Doomsaying and heavy warnings may make you feel superior or important, but they do nothing but scare people or piss them off, neither of which is helpful. Put me down as the latter.

What, you don't believe in basic evolutionary theory? The people in our business that are most able to adapt will be the ones with the jobs in the future. That's not the same as screaming "we're doomed" over and over, it's basic Darwinian theory applied to our careers. Scaring people a bit is helpful, if it means they'll start practicing their writing skills, or work to master the entire Final Cut Studio.
I agree completely with what Lenslinger wrote...I've been saying the same thing for a while now, though not quite as well. Do I say these things to feel superior or important? No, I say it because I feel it's important to be on the proactive side of the OMB issue. Don't sit back and hope you won't get fired...instead, acquire a skill set that will make you too valuable to let go. Make sure that you're the one that can do it all, and maybe it'll be a reporter that can't run a camera that's fired instead of you. If OMB never hits your place of work, so much the better, but if it does you'll be ready.

 

[PhrozenPhoto]

Part of the problem, and I think it is a small one is the fact that even if you do all of the above, you still might be shown the door. If a news director is told to cut the budget by X now, even if that means OMB's for his department he now has a choice, you or the talent. The talent, in most shops has a personal services contract that the station has to pay out for the remainder of that contract, you do not (most likely) So do they save you and still pay the diva her remaining contract for not even being in the building, or do they pay the Diva and save your salary, and when they find out she (or he for that matter) really sucks at OMB'ing they just don't renew their contract and promptly hire some kid out of college to replace them for 20k a year? That train of logic really sucks, but the scary thing is I think that train of thought is being accepted in more and more newsrooms, because it isn't a quality of product issue, it's a dollar issue. The sad irony is, if a station continues to put quality on in a fiscally responsible manner I think they could weather the storm. If they just put crap on, well people will only be entertained by a turd for so long before they flush it down the toilet for good.

 

[photogguy]

First of all, Stuart's right. Common sense can do that a lot of times.

Lenslinger nice post. One thing from your post stuck out for me and that was the line "it doesn't really matter". That seems to be the motto of our world today "It doesn't matter" or" It's good enough". When will it start to "matter" and when will it be "great".

The pendulum is swinging away from quality, toward "just get it done". Like it or not, that's the world of tv news right now. Will the pendulum swing back? Probably. But it's likely to take a while. And I recommend heeding Stuart's advice and adapting.

That's just short of Rosenblum's "Adapt or Die" I've been in this discussion more times than I can count, so I won't restate more than this: Stick to the facts. Doomsaying and heavy warnings may make you feel superior or important, but they do nothing but scare people or piss them off, neither of which is helpful. Put me down as the latter.

Doomsaying and heavy warnings aside, the facts are shooters have to adapt. Drink Rosenblum's kool-aid? No. But you will have to make yourself indispensible in the newsroom to not find your job on the chopping block.

 

[Chicago Dog]

That's just short of Rosenblum's "Adapt or Die" I've been in this discussion more times than I can count, so I won't restate more than this: Stick to the facts.

One need look no further than WKRN and KRON to understand the falsity of "adapt or die." Let's not forget: word's already hit that nobody is bulletproof. OMBs have been laid off, too.

Further, "expanding your skills" does not automatically mean writing. There's plenty of other jobs at the station that involve far more than OMBing.

 

[LongTimePhotog]

Freddie: I never once said I agree with MR. The doomsday thing was not in my post. I was talking about Lenslinger's. Some have stated that owners may get rid of you even if you roll with the punches. That may be true but why not try and do other things to secure your future. I see people let go almost weekly at my station and others in the market. It's a scarey time and if you don't help yourself then you may only have yourself to blame.

 

[sixtycyclehum]

First of all, Stuart's right. Common sense can do that a lot of times.



The pendulum is swinging away from quality, toward "just get it done". Like it or not, that's the world of tv news right now. Will the pendulum swing back? Probably. But it's likely to take a while. And I recommend heeding Stuart's advice and adapting.



Doomsaying and heavy warnings aside, the facts are shooters have to adapt. Drink Rosenblum's kool-aid? No. But you will have to make yourself indispensible in the newsroom to not find your job on the chopping block.

Ditto.

I think that when the ecomomy turns around the pendulum WILL swing back to quality. And when it does, people like Lenslinger will be in management because they worked their asses off during the "just get it done" phase. I know I'd like to be in charge when it swings back...

 

[cameragod]

Well… I have worked in a large market. I am a freelancer. I have jetted around the globe with a sound-man, a make-up chick and three skeevy handlers…. and you don’t get the do that by being a VJ.
I’ve always said there is a place for solo operators, some are even good at it but if the only reason to have them is to save money then the quality will suffer, those guys in sales will have nothing worth selling so less money comes in so more cost cutting and the death spiral continues.
You have to do what you have to do to protect you and yours but when management is making you swallow dead rats don’t grin and tell me they taste like chicken




Hey Stuart just out of interest have you got a link to one of the handycam heroes story on the job fair?

 

[Freddie Mercury]

Freddie: I never once said I agree with MR.

Neither did I.

The doomsday thing was not in my post.

"Roll with it, or it will roll over you." You don't know that, but you wrote it anyway.

why not try and do other things to secure your future.

I agree. Why not? Nothing wrong with that.

I get the feeling you assume I am against the whole idea of photographers reporting and vice versa, or that I deny that it is becoming more common. That's not my point at all.

My whole objection is to people whipping out the hyperbole and making these dire statements that I must heed or perish. That kind of talk usually means you're selling something.

 

[Lenslinger]

Interesting analysis, as I knew it would be. Again, I'm not advocating the VJ Principle, though it doesn't suck the very breath from lungs as it does others here. Neither am I suggesting you volunteer for handycam duty. I'm certainly not. There are many, many, many different types of shooters here: staffers, freelancers, network hotshots and small-market neophytes. If you work in a shop where budgets are ample and staffing is stable, where everything is always as it has been, then by all means proceed as normal. I no more wish to change your working conditions than I want to be the pool camera at the next pervert trial.

What I would like to do is offer an approach not covered by Rosenblum or his many detractors. And that approach is to simply broaden your horizons professionally.That way, when changes do come you're better prepared to survive than the burn-out at your shop who presses RECORD and daydreams all day. Nothing against that guy, mind you; I just believe his days are numbered and I'd hate to see the many young shooters who frequent this place assume that status quo is firmly in place. It ain't.

As for quality, and my statement that 'it doesn't really matter', allow me to clarify. Standards, that spoken level of quality that you will or will not accept, are not dictated by management. At least they shouldn't be. When I go out and shoot a story, I don't think about what my managers would like to see. Instead I rely on my own instincts, a internal set of directions I've honed for more years than I care to admit. Managers, trends, consultants, reporters, global warming...has little to nothing to do with the way I frame my shots, write my scripts. tweak my edits. If anyone affects my style (or lack thereof) it is the stable of veteran shooters back at the shop who will call me on it no matter how many ten dollar words I come up with.

Soooo, please don't infer from my diatribe that I think my way is better than yours, even if deep down inside, I know it's better for ME. I started long ago as a small market news shooter, fell in hate with a reporter I worked with at the time and decided I didn't need him. What followed was a somewhat illustrious one-man-band career, eons before Rosenblum re-packaged the age-old notion as prophecy. After a turbulent stint cranking out promo dreck for the man, I came to back news willingly - not as an on-air one-man-band, but as an anchor pack auteur. These days I spend 95 percent of my time turning packages for our anchors to voice. I wouldn't have it any other way.

I'm proud of my work. I'll put it up against anybody in this market - whether they come in pairs or all by their lonesome. I shoot with a full-sized XD, edit non-linear and rarely touch a wretched live truck. My stories are often the most memorable of their newscast - not because I'm all that brilliant, but because the bosses assign me the kind of visual stories they don't want to waste two-person crews on. That said, what works for me may not work for you - which is kind of my point: TV News ain't black and white. There are many, many approaches that can get the job done. Just because someone doesn't do it the way you do doesn't make it wrong. My original post was sparked by reading too many screeching threads that claimed quality can only be achieved by adhering to tablets cast in stone.

Oh, and Cameragod: I'll look for links to my competitors from the job fair, but remember, they weren't wielding handycams, only full sized rigs, which was pretty much, my point.

 

[cameragod]

...that will teach me to read in the morning before I put my glasses on.

 

[Hiding Under Here]

I don't think the pendulum will swing back towards quality any time soon. And I believe that Michael Rosenblum is more right than people here would ever acknowledge. In fact, five years from now I think his vision will more closely match what's happening in television production than most people here allow.

I don't assess the quality of shoots I've done based on the size of the crew doing the job. The best working days of my life were ones that allowed me time to think, to waste tape, to explore. And great subjects with whom to work. Some stories were wonderful and I felt privileged to be photographing them. A case in point: I once shot a piece for 20/20 about a young man in the Dominican Republic named Roberto who, because of a reaction to antibiotics when he was in his mother's womb, had legs that were attached backward at the knees. Roberto walked on all-fours and the people in his village called him the "horse boy". We went down to the DR for a few days and shot the story there. Then we traveled with Roberto to Orlando and shot him as he was about to have his legs amputated so that he could wear prosthetics and walk erect. In the final stage, we returned to Orlando and photographed Roberto relearning to walk. Then we returned with him to his village and captured the reaction of his family and friends as they witnessed him walking on his new legs.

That story had an "arc"; a beginning, middle and end. It took viewers somewhere interesting and introduced them to someone who didn't speak their language yet whose story was compelling, maybe even inspirational. It was a story that required a significant amount of money to produce. And it is the absence of money -- not the lack of great stories -- that will keep future great stories from being told.

With shows like TurningPoint, 20/20, Street Stories, 48 Hours, even Dateline at its migrant farm workers best, the golden era of the news magazine program thrilled me. Sure on any given week they ran dogs of stories. More often than not, though, I was fascinated by how many terrific tales existed in the world at any given time. Ed Bradley did a piece on Street Stories about an American woman in Bosnia or Serbia. She had been an off-Broadway actress and was now a photographer. Her foot had been blown off in a firefight and she had been raped by soldiers on numerous occasions. But she also possessed monumental humanity. She had rescued one of the prisoners in a Bosnian war camp whose emaciated image had been featured on the cover of Newsweek. And Ed got her to sing for him. Watching the piece gave me a feeling of satisfaction, like reading a good short story. I hadn't wasted my time in front of the TV, as I feel I do now more often than not.

Quality, in the traditional model, costs money. Lots of money. The lack of money has forced most network magazine news programs to scale back their approach, to reduce their search for good stories. Like watching a marathon runner who has suffered a severe stroke hobble around, it's painful to see the on-air product of so many of these formerly excellent programs. If they still exist. The lone exception is 60 Minutes. It's still great. But it costs a lot of money to make.

We can rail all we want about how entertainment corporations have corrupted the journalistic integrity of television news. But at this point, that argument is moot. The future of "quality" as it relates to the video/television/internet medium rests on several things: 1. the producer's access to an outlet with an appreciable audience, 2. the producer's production capabilities -- can they make a solid story? can they develop worthy stories? 3. Money. Can the producer sustain their efforts with the proceeds derived from their labors? Can they earn enough to make a living?

Michael Rosenblum pisses everybody off primarily because they judge his preaching in a personal cum traditional context. What he says threatens their jobs, their livelihoods, their pay level. There's no doubt that what he's preaching, were it to be adopted by the industry, would destroy "quality" as we understand it. But I believe Rosenblum when he says that he pontificates here because he believes photographers have the best skill set to succeed in his VJ schema. The video, audio and editing are really tough things to master. You can work on your writing with very rudimentary tools. Not so with the technology of television. Quality, it would seem, begins with us. And we all know it.

The problem we have is money. Or lack of it. And access to outlets. But if you look at Rosenblum, he's conquered those issues. He's not afraid to make a product. Nor is he afraid to sell it. Yet he understands, as we all do -- if we're being honest -- that the photographer, by and large, works for other people, not him/her self. And that mentality can be a problem because even though we contribute to making programs, we don't generally make them up. That kind of one-dimensionality doesn't bode well for our ability to sell our ideas, our concepts. Many of us have not enterprised stories, have no experience pitching them to those who have the ability to distribute or display programming. That's a deficiency that most of us would have to address in order to succeed in the new world order that will emerge from the collision of television the internet and the new Great Depression.

 

[Oldhuskie]

I want to know what is going to happen after all these people by their new flat screen tv's and get there HDTV then have to watch crap on air. I just don't think people will put up with Youtube looking crap on their large very clear screen. I do agree with Lenslinger that we have to expand our horizons.

 

[John M.]

I want to know what is going to happen after all these people by their new flat screen tv's and get there HDTV then have to watch crap on air.

They're going to watch Blu-Ray movies, sports events and on-demand cable shows.

The same things for which they're already largely forsaken TV news.

 

[newsismylife]

I'm proud of my work. I'll put it up against anybody in this market - whether they come in pairs or all by their lonesome. I shoot with a full-sized XD, edit non-linear and rarely touch a wretched live truck. My stories are often the most memorable of their newscast - not becuase I'm all that brilliant, but because the bosses assign me tghe kind of visual stories they don't want to waste two-person crews.

I think one man bands have their place. I don't disagree that it saves money.

But....

-Explain to me how the day to day quality is better

-Explain to me how it produces more stories with supposedly better quality.

Will my opinions change the thought process of management? No


Would the whole newsroom work on a OMB/VJ model? No


Another thing to consider is that on a local news level 98% of the stories are decided in the editorial meetings.

OMB/VJ's work well with the right person. It's not a one answer solution to staffing a newsroom.


We as an industry should be doing everything we can to raise the bar.